Event co-creation as choreography : autoethnographic study on event volunteer knowing

(1)

(2)

A C TA U N I V E R S I TAT I S L A P P O N I E N S I S 3 5 8

Minni Haanpää

Event co-creation as choreography

Autoethnographic study on event volunteer knowing

Academic dissertation

to be publicly defended with the permission of the Faculty of Social Sciences at the University of Lapland

in lecture room 3 on 16 September 2017 at 12 noon

(3)

(4)

A C TA U N I V E R S I TAT I S L A P P O N I E N S I S 3 5 8

Minni Haanpää

Event co-creation as choreography

(5)

University of Lapland Faculty of Social Sciences

Layout: Taittotalo PrintOne Cover: Sasu Haanpää

Cover photo: Joey ompson / Unsplash Sales:

Lapland University Press PL 8123

FI-96101 Rovaniemi, Finland tel. +358 40 821 4242 publications@ulapland. www.ulapland.fi/LUP

Printed at Digipaino Kirjaksi.Net, Vaajakoski 2017

Printed:

Acta Universitatis Lapponiensis 358 ISBN 978-952-337-023-4

ISSN 0788-7604 Pdf:

Acta electronica Universitatis Lapponiensis 225 ISBN 978-952-337-024-1

ISSN 1796-6310 University of Lapland Faculty of Social Sciences

Layout: Taittotalo PrintOne Cover: Sasu Haanpää

Sales:

Lapland University Press PL 8123

FI-96101 Rovaniemi, Finland tel. +358 40 821 4242 www.ulapland.fi/LUP

Printed at Digipaino Kirjaksi.Net, Vaajakoski 2017

Printed:

Acta Universitatis Lapponiensis 358 ISBN 978-952-337-023-4

ISSN 0788-7604 Pdf:

Acta electronica Universitatis Lapponien sis 225 ISBN 978-952-337-024-1

ISSN 1796-6310

(6)

Abstract

Event Co-Creation as Choreography

Events are an ever-growing phenomenon in contemporary society. They are used to make different places and spaces more visitable and to market places, products and services. Volunteers are often a significant social and economic interest group in the creation of events and festivals. The significance of the group has been recognised in event (management) literature, but little attention has been paid to the group’s knowledge and its role in event creation.

Volunteers have mostly been considered as manageable objects, and the group’s knowledge and agency have been excluded.

This research focuses on volunteer knowledge and its role in the imple- mentation of events. The research task is tackled by using the concept of co-creation to examine the event context. Co-creation discussion, originat- ing from services marketing, relies heavily on the concept of knowledge in explaining value-creation for different offerings. In this study, event and festival environments are understood as co-creational arenas where actors practice their knowledge. To further the idea of knowledge in co-creation discussion the concept of choreography is used as an analytical framework.

The concept originates from cultural and performance studies and gives access to the relationship between place, space, experiences and knowledge.

Choreography constructs knowledge as active doings performed through the body that is referred to as ‘knowing’ in this study.

Empirically, the phenomenon of volunteer knowing is explored through a multi-sited, longitudinal affective autoethnography, based on the author’s work as a volunteer at Finnish festivals and events for more than ten years.

In addition to personal fieldwork diaries, the data consists of stories written by other volunteers, photographs, event and festival materials for volunteers and general audiences, and a variety of traditional and social media materials, including videos. The autoethnographic approach provides an opportunity to explore the way volunteer knowledge plays a role in event co-creation.

(7)

The analysis shows how volunteer knowing manifests at different levels.

At a macro-level, the study casts light on how the knowing from different life spheres, embodied by the volunteers, comes to operate in event choreography. At a meso-level, the ways in which the social, material and temporal pre-choreographies of events guide volunteer knowing are analysed. At a micro-level, the way knowing builds as kinaesthetic and affective practice is shown. The theoretical contribution of this study is threefold, and it extends to different fields of study. First, through exploring the character of volunteer, the study contributes to marketing research and furthers the understanding of the relationship between production and consumption in the co-creation discussion. The second contribution lies in event management studies, in constructing volunteer knowledge as an active phenomenon built longitudi- nally through different experiences. The third contribution is made to event co-creation discussions, by constructing volunteers as an active party in event co-creation. The managerial implications of the study cast light on the power structures, materialities and affectivity guiding volunteer knowing.

Keywords: event, co-creation, choreography, volunteers, knowing, autoeth- nography

(8)

Acknowledgements

Writing of this thesis has been a thoroughly affective learning process on the joys and agonies of academic life. During this journey, I have encountered numerous people who helped and supported my work and me. Without these people, there would be no dissertation. I’m truly thankful to all of you.

I owe my heartfelt thanks to the supervisors of my work along the way.

My sincere gratitude to Anu Valtonen, whose work got me into the world of cultural marketing research before I had even met her in person. Thank you, Anu, for introducing me to this intriguing world of research as well as supporting my long process all the way. Your comments, suggestions and trust in my competence have been crucial for my work! I wish to thank Soile Veijola for asking me to join the Tourism as Work project, in which the subject of this research was formed and the whole dissertation project put forward. Thank you, Soile, for also teaching me the ways of academic writing. I also thank Antti Haahti, who first recruited me to become a doctoral thesis researcher at the University of Lapland and supported my work in its early phases. I’m deeply indebted to Outi Rantala, who has had different roles from peer to supervisor during my dissertation process. However, Outi’s support as a supervisor was invaluable during the final stages of writing this work. Outi, you are a true wonder woman!

A warm thank you to both of my pre-examiners Katherine Dashper and Bernard Cova. The work of Katherine on autoethnographic methodology in the field of event studies was very ensuring, and it gave me courage and support to pursue on my autoethnographic path. Katherine’s thorough and critical, yet supportive, comments helped me to find a final form for the study. I’m delighted to have you as my opponent, Katherine. Bernard Cova’s work on cultural marketing has been an inspiration for me from the very beginning of this study. The knowledgeable comments I received gave me the opportunity to improve the final manuscript.

(9)

Along the way, I have had the privilege to work with great colleagues in different research projects and groups. Thank you so much José-Carlos García- Rosell, Maria Hakkarainen and Sanna Kyyrä, for all the different discussions and shared projects. Besides being academically solid, you are just fun to be around and the most supportive colleagues I know! Also, thank you, Vesa Markuksela, Ari Virtanen, Mika Kylänen and Joonas Rokka, for insightful discussions and collaboration along this PhD project. In the Tourism as Work project, I was lucky to receive mentoring from Seija Tuulentie and Jarno Valkonen, whose expertise and advice I greatly appreciate. Even though I have never met Jaana Parviainen in person, I wish to thank her for introducing me to the central concept of this study, choreography. One should never underestimate the power of a good lecture! The comments received later on from Sandra Wallenius-Korkalo on the same concept were also extremely valuable for the forming of my theoretical framework.

During my dissertation process, I have worked first in the Faculty of Social Sciences and later in the Multidimensional Tourism Institute. Both research communities have offered me great support in different forums: workshops, seminars, and informal conversations. I wish to especially thank Johan Edelheim for supporting my work and convincing me of the idea to make a monography. I’m also thankful to Jennie Germann Molz on commenting my work during her researcher exchange in the MTI. Thank you, Jari Järviluoma, Tiina Seppälä, Emily Höckert, Veera Kinnunen, Tarja Salmela, Tiina Qvist and Hanna Peltomaa for peer and collegial support in different stages of this process. In the MTI, the teaching and development endeavors and the people encountered through them have also had a strong impact on my work.

A special thanks to Kaarina Kantele, Tarja Tammia, Veli-Matti Hettula and Annika Anttila on instructive collaboration regarding teaching of events and festival volunteering. And naturally, a sincere thank you, to all my colleagues in the MTI for the inspiring and creative working atmosphere.

I am thankful for the Academy of Finland, the Finnish Concordia Fund, the Lapland Regional Fund of the Finnish Cultural Fund, the Jenny and Antti Wihuri Foundation and the University of Lapland for financially supporting my work. I would also like to thank Dominika Klos for her assistance in arranging and transcribing the data, Paula Kassinen for helping me to

(10)

finalise this dissertation to its print form and Proof-reading-service.com for proofreading the manuscript.

There are two persons outside academia who have been very influential in my being able to make the autoethnographic account the way it is in this study. I wish to thank Outi Kallas, who taught me that dancing is walking, and Irma Tuisku, who taught me more about self-reflexivity in practice than any academic text ever did. There is also a group of people, without whom this research would not have been possible in the first place. I express my sincere gratitude to all my peer event volunteers with whom I have collaborated during the process. The knowing and experiences we shared together were not only important in regards to this study but also to me personally as well.

I also wish to thank organisers of all the events researched who all were very open-minded towards my research endeavour. My sincere thank you also goes to my “partner in crime” Raila, with whom we dived into the world of events back in the day, sharing the same passion, and with whom we are always able to give constructive critiques on any event organisation.

My most profound thanks to my family. My parents, Kaiju and Pekka, from you I have learnt that one should follow her passion. And all my siblings and your families – you are an invaluable asset and support in my life! Special thanks to Sasu, who made the covers of this book.

My monkeys, Niilo and Joona, as your mom I’ve many times felt bad being so absent minded or even physically absent during these years. However, at the same time, I know that I am a better mom to you getting to do the things that are important to me. I wish that you will also learn to follow your passion and aspirations in life! And finally, without a doubt, I owe my deepest gratitude to Jyri. This journey has been one hell of a bumpy ride, but I’ve always been able to count on your support. Words cannot express what it means to me.

Rovaniemi, July 23, 2017 Minni

(11)

List of tables

1. Event volunteer studies categorised by journals ...24 2. The main themes of research on event volunteering ...27

(12)

1 Introduction

1.1 “Let’s make a memorable experience together!”

I do my hair and make-up and check that I have all things needed in my back pack. I take my bike and cycle the four-kilometre route to the festival site. I’m excited, but try to look cool. On my way I see people walking and cycling towards the area. They look happy, excited and some a bit tipsy as well. As I approach the area, I go to collect my badge from the service gate and walk in. I look at the crowd entering the gates, getting their wristbands and being security checked. I walk towards the back stage and get in, showing my badge to the security guard at the gate.

The excerpt above describes the beginning of a festival volunteer experience;

the excitement and enthusiasm of the beginning of an annual, yet always different, festival. The origin of this study arises from such an experience; my personal pursuits as a volunteer in festivals and events. Volunteering was, and has been, my hobby and later professional interest for several years. I was first involved in volunteering as a university student and have continued to volunteer at several events since. Volunteering has been professional development, a way of gaining new experiences and making them for others but also a way to travel and spend time with friends. Along my volunteering experiences I began to wonder why the same kinds of challenges were often encountered when running events, and why were these not developed, even though they were reported to team leaders and could have been fixed for the next year.

This rather practical discrepancy was what got me interested in volunteer knowing, and its role in event production in the first place.

Many events and festivals depend heavily on a volunteer workforce. Volun- teering is often a major source of economy in event organisation practice (e.g.

Andersson & Getz, 2009, p. 259; Pesonen, Holmberg, & Komppula, 2016,

(15)

p. 10), since it is “work done with no or at most token pay for the benefit of both other people and the volunteer” (Stebbins, 2004, p. 5). Volunteering also has a significant effect in creating the event experience and image for the audience, in many cases. As stated by Niina Hattunen, the executive director of Ilosaarirock, a major Finnish rock festival: “Volunteers are an economic investment, but it is impossible to try and buy the atmosphere they bring to the festival” (Juvonen, 2016). This is in many cases the expectation of volunteers, as the heading of this chapter is seen as a common phrase in the volunteer training materials for a number of events. Volunteers perform various tasks at events and festivals, such as site building and dismantling, merchandise sales, ticket sales, information and media centre work, roadying, participant accreditation, and VIP- or backstage hosting, depending on the event. A national survey of 34 Finnish festivals about their use of volunteers revealed that the most common volunteer tasks are audience services, for example at the festival information desk, ticket sales, and security control. About half the festivals studied reported that they use a voluntary workforce for artist services, such as hosting (Iso-Aho, 2011, p. 19).

In general, the work of volunteers largely concentrates on the execution phase of the festivals and events (e.g. Smith, Baum, Holmes, & Lockstone- Binney, 2014). According to Finland Festivals, the national collaboration forum for Finland’s leading cultural events, the number of volunteers at member festivals organised in 2014 was approximately 7400, compared to a total of 1761 full-time and part-time employed staff*(Finland Festivals, 2015).

In comparison, at the 2012 London Olympics there were 70 000 volunteers performing over 800 different tasks during the games (e.g. Volunteers: Helping to make the…). In another comparison, at the World Athletic Championships 2005 in Helsinki, Finland, the value of the 420 000 working hours undertaken by the 3000 volunteers in the event was estimated to be around five million Euros (Laakso, Kilpeläinen, Kostiainen, & Susiluoto, 2006).

Even though volunteers are a powerful group in events, their ties to the event organisation may be different: some work directly under the organisation, some are involved through different associations and clubs. In the

* Of whom there were 174 working full-time and 1587 temporary and/or part-time workers.

(16)

international volunteer field, a growing number of volunteers also volunteer through the agencies that organise workforces for events. In the latter cases, the festival organisation usually pays for the associations and the people volunteer to support their own organisation. In Finland organisational volunteering is less common, but in Britain, for example, there are many organisations and associations that offer volunteers for festivals.

According to Iso-Aho (2011, p. 20) the profile of volunteers resembles the audience profile to some extent. Many volunteers return annually, but in order to establish volunteer retention, the rhetorics and understanding of the volunteer experience are important.

In Finland, the youngest volunteers can be found at rock festivals (18-25 years). Generally the volunteers at all cultural events are quite young, but there are also older people present. Event organisers usually expect volunteers to be of legal age (18 years old in Finland). People aged 30-40 years old seem to be mostly missing from the volunteer scene. A possible explanation for this might be that they have other obligations in life at that age. Ageing is also a challenge in some Finnish festivals. Retention is important for events that are annual. Again, as the heading of this chapter illustrates, event organisers tend to approach the recruited volunteers, but also potential volunteers, through different metaphors involving experiences, fun and family. A leisure and free-time rhetoric is used rather than one based on pursuing work or working life experiences. Family metaphors are also commonly used (Iso- Aho, 2011, pp. 21-25).

Events have been studied in numerous disciplines, such as anthropol- ogy, geography and economics (Getz, 2008, p. 405). Events have also been a popular topic of study in the tourism literature (see Getz & Page, 2016).

According to Goldblatt (1990) events are unique moments in time which include a ceremony or ritual to fulfill certain needs. Festivals, which are often also discussed under the term ‘events’, as they are in this study, stand out from other events on the basis of their content, which is an artistic endeavour, by being limited in their duration, and by their recurrent nature (e.g. Silvanto, 2016, p. 8). In general, events are attached to certain spaces, places and times, and even if they are organised repeatedly, they are always unique because of the interplay between the place, people and management practices (Getz, 2008).

(17)

There is a vast number of studies focusing on events and their role in tourism, and event (management) studies have gradually gained ground as their own area of study. According to Getz (2002), however, event studies (and/or management) cannot be described as an academic discipline, but have rather been the focus of empirical enquiries. Accordingly, (economic) impact studies are one of the largest streams of literature (e.g. Getz, 2008).

Other common subjects of study include event attendee motivations and different aspects of destination marketing through events (e.g. Quinn, 2013).

Management-oriented event research has by and large been dominated by empiricism rather than theorising (Getz, 2008). As a result of such practices, the interpretive and socially constructed accounts that might result in a deeper understanding of the phenomenon have received little attention (Lamond

& Platt, 2016; see also Tribe, 2008, p. 246). Socio-psychological issues were ignored for a long period of time in event management research, resulting in a potential loss of understanding regarding several success factors (Formica, 1998, in Getz, 2002, p. 14; Lamond & Platt, 2016). In order to produce a more accurate understanding on the challenges facing the management and development of events nowadays, complementary methodological stances are needed (Getz, 2008, p. 422).

This study takes part in the discussions of marketing and event (management) studies. I examine the concept of co-creation, a remarkable paradigm in today’s marketing, in event context. More specifically, I analyse the concept of knowledge which lies in the heart of co-creation. By doing this I hope to cast light on the latter issues by considering new ways of understanding volunteer knowledge in event production and consumption. Previous research suggests that the volunteers’ important role must be recognised for the creation of sus- tainable event management practices (see Ralston, Lumsdon, & Downward, 2005, p. 515). The co-creation paradigm has its foundations in knowledge about, and of, the customers (Prahalad & Ramaswamy, 2004; Vargo & Lusch, 2004). Market knowledge is negotiated between different groups of actors (Jaworski & Kohli, 2006; Li & Petrick, 2008). The importance of knowledge lies in the value it creates for the service (Vargo & Lusch, 2004). Volunteers take part in the co-creation of an event and are important actors and informants in producing the event’s service culture (see Arnould, Price, & Malshe, 2006).

(18)

The productisation of spaces and places, which is in action in the case of events, is always the result of leaning on someone’s knowledge (e.g. Johansson

& Kociatkiewicz, 2011; Luonila, 2016; Tribe 2008), however, the concept of co-creation remains relatively untreated in the literature concerning events (e.g. Larson, 2009; cf. Rihova, 2013). I claim that volunteers possess and gain a great deal of knowledge in the event production process. This can originate from many different sources. For example, volunteers may be enthusiasts about the subject they are volunteering in, they can possess relevant knowledge from their paid work or they might be representatives or experts on the local culture and conditions (e.g. Jones, 2005; Smith, 2003). During an event they also encounter many situations where social, bodily and affective knowledge is gained (see e.g. Veijola & Valtonen, 2007). Here, the aim is to examine the different forms of knowledge used and created in the co-creation process.

In this study, I set out to examine volunteer knowing in event co-creation.

I shall employ - and develop - the concept of choreography as a lens through which to understand volunteer knowing in event co-creation, which opens up the phenomenon at hand as embodied and based on movement. I have conducted multi-sited autoethnographical fieldwork, and ask three research questions:

How can volunteers be understood as co-creators moving between production and consumption?

How do the pre-choreographies of the events guide volunteer knowing?

How do volunteers know in the events, through moving and affective bodies?

1.2 Volunteering defined

There are number of definitions of volunteering that range from academic definitions to policy level specifications. Volunteering has been studied and defined extensively in the academic literature, however, both academic and policy accounts tend to focus on the volunteering done in the most obvious third sector of society; the health, welfare and social sector. The other major volunteering sector that has gained attention is sport. Smith, Baum, Holmes

(19)

and Lockstone-Binney (2014, p. 2) suggest in their recent book on event volunteering, following the statement of Cuskelly et al. (2004, in Smith et al., 2014), that the phenomenon is complex and there is no consensus about what the term means.

The general definitions at a policy level view volunteering as unpaid altruistic activity. The European Youth Forum has defined volunteering as “an activity undertaken of a person’s own free will and involves the commitment of time and energy to actions of benefit to others and to society as a whole;

the activity is unpaid but can include reimbursement of expenses directly related to the voluntary activity; it is for a non-profit cause and is primarily undertaken within a nongovernmental organization and therefore cannot be motivated by material or financial gain; volunteering should not be used to substitute or replace paid employment” (Youth Forum, 2004). In a statement that reviews the EU member states laws and regulations, volunteering is commonly described as an activity that is: performed with the free will of the individual; is developed in the framework of non-profit, nongovernmental organisations; has no professional character; is non-paid; and carried out for the benefit of the community or a third party (GHK, 2010, p. 55). Policy-level definitions are strongly based on third sector-based volunteering, and as such do not capture all aspects of the current event volunteering phenomenon. For example, many festivals are no longer non-profit-making, and volunteering is also used for educational/professional purposes. When considering event volunteering, policy level reviews tend to omit event volunteering done in the cultural sector, but the well-represented sports sector probably includes most volunteering at sports events (e.g. GHK, 2010; see also Iso-Aho, 2011, p. 11).

This may be due to the relatively small volume of volunteering, compared to that in the other sectors, as well as a view of volunteering as more a hobby than a serious activity (Iso-Aho, 2011, p. 11).

To better define event volunteering, I consider the different paradigms presented for volunteering in the academic literature (Rochester, Paine, &

Howlett, 2010; see also Pessi & Oravasaari, 2010, p. 10-11). According to Rochester, Paine & Howlett (2010), volunteering can be viewed from (at least) three different perspectives, and this affects the way it is defined. The non-profit paradigm is the most traditional understanding of voluntary work,

(20)

which is visible in the EU-level policy statements noted above. It understands the phenomenon as an unpaid, altruistic community service in third sector organisations. The roles of volunteers are generally clearly predefined by the organisations and associations arranging the volunteering activity. The second approach, the civil society paradigm, adds to the non-profit paradigm by also taking into consideration different forms of peer help and civic activism, which are also major motivations for volunteering. According to this paradigm, the organisations where volunteering is performed can also be informal, and the roles performed are commonly created based on the interests and capacities of the volunteers. The third volunteering paradigm views the phenomenon from the individual’s point-of-view and constructs volunteering as useful free time (serious leisure) (see also Stebbins, 2004). The motivation to volunteer in this case is mainly intrinsic, such as learning new skills or networking, concentrating on the goals of the actor/person over communal goals. The range of operation is diverse, but concentrates on the fields of sports and culture (Rochester et al., 2010).

Societal trends also affect the ways that volunteering is valued and performed. Rochester, Paine and Howlett (2010) have listed specific trends affecting volunteering in general. These are individualism, consumer society, a culture of aspirations and desires, religion and secularisation, increased risk and control over the fore mentioned, the rise of (new) technology and a longing for community. These trends affect volunteering in different ways.

The rise of individualism in western societies, which emphasises the choices of individuals, has diminished interest in the work of associations. Consumer society trends point in the same direction, where individual values and lifestyles are presented through consumption, and consumption is generally considered a virtue in contemporary society. The culture of aspiration and desires arises from increased educational levels, and causes people to be more demanding in their endeavours since they are used to expecting a high quality of life. There is also less interest in religion and the values that it represents. On the other hand, the alternative spiritual market is rising. The societal trend to anticipate and control risks has led to more visible and restrictive preparation for them, which results in greater qualification requirements for volunteering, such as the different licenses needed for various tasks. The rise of technol-

(21)

ogy has been obvious and rapid. Media devices are affecting ways of being together and engaging in social activity. In the age of individualisation in the western societies, the longing for community is also on the rise, yet these new communities are selected through individual needs (Rochester et al., 2010).

These trends have different consequences for the voluntary field, some of them being in favour of event volunteering. The valuing of individual aspirations and interests has led to project-based action in all levels of society. Event volunteering is considered a typical example of this; as Smith and Holmes (2009, p. 406) have explained, it is in many cases episodic and as such infrequent, occasional and short term. Volunteering is one way of presenting individual values and lifestyles, to develop personally and/or professionally as well as joining communities of like-minded people. International event volunteering reflects this phenomenon. For example the Roskilde festival in Denmark gathers much of its voluntary workforce from Poland (see Iso-Aho, 2011, p. 14). Individual interests and values are also represented through civic event organising, where carnivals and festivals are organised in loose interest- based networks. One very popular example in Finland, during recent years, has been the Restaurant Day food carnival, which has no official organisation.

Civil societal causes are also expressed through events, such as the Reclaim the Streets street party.

Stebbins (1992, 2004) has theorised volunteering as a leisure activity, and his ideas are commonly cited in event volunteering discussions. He constructs leisure from three different viewpoints, which highlight the commitment of volunteers towards the activity: serious, casual and project-based leisure. Steb- bins explains serious leisure as “a systematic pursuit of an amateur, hobbyist, or volunteer core activity that is highly substantial, interesting, and fulfilling and where, in the typical case, participants find a career in acquiring and expressing a combination of its special skills, knowledge, and experience” (Stebbins, 1992, p. 3). Casual leisure is again flexible. It is not work-like and does not involve personal obligations. Relative freedom is maintained towards the commitments made. Project-based leisure is “a short-term, moderately complicated, either one-shot or occasional, though infrequent, creative undertaking carried out in free time … involves considerable planning, effort, and sometimes skill or knowledge, but for all that is not of the serious variety nor intended to develop

(22)

into such”. It is also not casual leisure, since it takes place on regular occasions, even though they might be widely spaced, such as festivals (Stebbins, 2005).

Event volunteering has been considered through the different paradigms presented in this sub-chapter. The paradigms of civic engagement and useful free-time or serious leisure seem to be more accurate when defining event volunteering. Casual volunteering is also seen as a way of event volunteering.

As Smith, Baum, Holmes and Lockstone-Binney (2014, p. 2) bring forward, the definition of event volunteering is not stable but more of a continuum between paradigms, depending on the study. It has been claimed, however, that despite extant social scientific study on volunteering, “a complete understanding on why people initiate and continue to volunteer remains elusive”

(Lockstone-Binney, Holmes, Smith, & Baum, 2010, p. 447).

1.3 Previous research on event volunteering

The literature on event volunteering has been growing during the last decade (e.g. Smith et al., 2014, p. 5). In their recent edited book on event volunteering, Smith, Baum, Holmes and Lockstone-Binney (2014, pp. 5-10) under- took a thorough literature review on the subject. In this exhaustive review of articles over a 25 year time period from three academic databases (ABI Inform, Hospitality & Tourism Complete and ProQuest), they identified a total of 59 articles that concentrated on event volunteers. Among these, there are certain main characteristics to be noted. The researchers recognised that most focus has been on case studies of large-scale sporting events. There are many fewer studies on arts and cultural festivals. The studies performed tend to be single event studies and only a few compare events. Methodologically, quantitative approaches have been dominant and the most typical way of collecting data has been surveying the volunteers in a certain point of the event life cycle. More recent studies include qualitative approaches. Most of the studies were carried out from the view point of the volunteers. According to the literature review, the researchers were able to identify certain themes in event volunteering research, the most popular of which were studies that focused on volunteer motivations, their experiences and satisfaction.

(23)

Since the literature review only extends to 2013, I conducted a follow-up review using the same criteria as Smith, Baum, Holmes and Lockstone-Binney (2014). From the year 2013 until 2016 (June) I searched the three databases noted, with the same search terms used in the original literature review:

‘volunteer AND event’ and ‘volunteer AND festival’, examining the articles that included these terms either in their abstract and/or keywords. I excluded the articles from 2013 that were already in the literature review made by the previous authors. Following the principles of the previous literature review I also excluded articles where the volunteers were not the main focus. This practice left me with the total of 41 articles. The obvious finding when compared to the previous literature review is that the topic of event volunteering has flourished over the last three years: using the same criteria, 59 articles were found during a 25 year period, compared to 41 articles in a three year period.

I entered the articles found on an Excel spreadsheet, categorising them with the following criteria: author(s), title, journal title, year of publication, journal volume, DOI, theme of the article, methodological approach, the exact research method, type of event, case/longitudinal study, database, type of journal. Of these categories the theme of article, methodological approach and method, event type, type of study and journal were drawn from Smith, Baum, Holmes and Lockstone-Binney’s (2014) literature review, in order to produce comparable data. As noted by the authors of the original literature review, the same biases applied to the follow-up: it “did not capture a small number of other known studies and book chapters were not included” (Smith et al., 2014, p. 6). For example the chapters of the edited book on event volunteer experiences by Smith, Lockstone-Binney, Holmes and Baum (2014) do not appear in the results. Despite this, the review can be seen as a representative sample of the topic.

The results of the follow-up literature review were very similar to those of the original review. There has been no significant changes in the publications, focus, themes or methods of the studies (see Tables 1 and 2). Tables 1 and 2 combine the results of the original literature review and the follow up made for this study; altogether 100 articles. There were no significant changes in the publication forums, other than the number of publications in non-profit journals increasing notably (Table 1). There are more publications in manage-

(24)

ment journals than non-profit journals in the original literature review, but when adding the results from the follow-up review, the order of the two was exchanged. This might be due to an observation made by Smith, Baum, Hol- mes and Lockstone-Binney (2014), who proposed that the interest in episodic volunteering has increased, and events are good examples of such activity in general. Otherwise, the results of the follow-up resemble the original review.

Case studies of large-scale sporting events still dominate the research into event volunteers. Altogether nine studies out of 41 articles in the follow-up review were not case studies. Methodologically, quantitative methods were still the most common means of researching event volunteers. The trend recognised by Smith, Baum, Holmes and Lockstone-Binney (2014, p. 8) in the original literature review, is also visible in the follow-up: the number of qualitative studies continues to grow, even though they are still a minority.

(25)

Table 1. Event volunteer studies categorised by journals.

Journal

category Journal name Articles Event

journals (29 articles)

Event Management (18) Aisbett and Hoye (2014); Bachman et al. (2016);

Bang (2009); Bang et al. (2008); Bang et al.

(2014a); Bang et al. (2009); Cuskelly et al. (2004);

Darcy et al. (2014); Dickson et al. (2013); Elstad (2003); Fairley et al. (2013); Giannoulakis et al.

(2007); Kim et al. (2010a); Lockstone-Binney et al. (2015); Love et al. (2012); Monga (2006);

Ralston et al. (2004); Wakelin (2013) International Journal

of Event Management Research (4)

Baum and Lockstone (2007); Bendle and Patter- son (2008); Leigh et al. (2013); Pauline (2011) International Journal Of

Event & Festival Manage- ment (4)

Dickson et al. (2014); Giannoulakis et al. (2015);

Ragsdell and Jepson (2014); VanSickle et al.

(2015) Journal of Convention

and Event Tourism (3)*

Bachman et al. (2014); Landey and Silvers (2004); Lee et al. (2013)

Leisure journals (16 articles)

Managing Leisure (9) Allen and Bartle (2014); Downward et al. (2005);

Hede and Rentschler (2007); Lockstone and Baum (2009); Lockstone et al. (2010); Skirstad and Hanstad (2013); Solberg (2003); Treuren (2014); Zhuang and Girginov (2012) Leisure/Loisir: journal of

the Canadian Associa- tion for Leisure Studies (4)

Grammatikopoulos et al. (2006); Long and Goldenberg (2010); MacLean and Hamm (2007); Treuren (2009)

World Leisure Journal (2) Campbell (2010); Gravelle and Larocque (2005) Annals of Leisure Re-

search (1)

Aisbett et al. (2015) Sport and

physical activity journals (16 articles)

Sport Management Review (5)

Allen and Shaw (2009); Hoeber (2010); Kim et al. (2010b); Kristiansen et al. (2015); Shaw (2009)

Journal of Sport Man- agement (3)

Fairley et al. (2007); Filo et al. (2009); Peachey et al. (2015)

Journal of Sport and Tourism (2)*

Fairley et al. (2014); Jarvis and Blank (2011) Sport in Society (2) Bladen (2010); Skille and Hanstad (2013) Other sport journals (1 in

each publication)

Chanavat and Ferrand (2010); Han et al. (2013);

Khoo and Engelhorn (2011); Kodama et al.

(2013); Surujlal (2010); Wollebaek et al. (2014)

(26)

Tourism journals (13 articles)

Journal of Convention and Event Tourism (3)*

Bachman et al. (2014); Landey and Silvers (2004); Lee et al. (2013)

Journal of Sport and Tourism (2)*

Fairley et al. (2014); Jarvis and Blank (2011) Tourism and Hospitality:

Planning and Develop- ment (2)

Downward and Ralston (2005); Khoo and Engelhorn (2007)

Other tourism journals (1

in each publication) Gallarza et al. (2009); Gallarza et al. (2013); Lee et al. (2014a); Nassar and Talaat (2009); Ralston et al. (2005); Wang and Yu (2015)

Non-profit journals (12 articles)

Voluntas (6) Fayos Gardó et al. (2014); Kumnig et al. (2015);

Nichols and Ojala (2009); Sheptak and Menaker (2016); Tomazos and Luke (2015); Wang and Wu (2014)

Nonprofit and Voluntary

Sector Quarterly (2) Güntert et al. (2015); Peachey et al. (2014) Other non-profit journals

(1 in each publication) Lee et al. (2014b); Parris and Peachey (2012);

Wilks (2015) Manage-

ment journals (8 articles)

(1 in each publication) Aisbett and Hoye (2015); Bang et al. (2014b);

Clayton (2016); Gordon and Erkut (2005); John Lucas (2014); Katzeff and Ware (2007); Kemp (2002); Pauline and Pauline (2009)

Other journals (7 articles)

(1 in each publication) Benson et al. (2014); Fanshan et al. (2013);

Gordon and Erkut (2004); Nichols and Ralston (2011, 2012); Webber (2012); Wu et al. (2014) Source: Smith, Baum, Holmes and Lockstone-Binney (2014, p. 7), with the follow-up literature review by the author added.

The results of the follow-up literature review again resemble the original regarding the research themes of the event volunteer studies (see Smith et al., 2014, p. 9). I construed the themes according to the keywords and article content. The studies found fit easily under the themes of the original literature review and there was no need to create new categories (see Smith et al., 2014). Seven articles could not be fitted neatly into a single theme, and they were placed in two categories in the review. Table 2 shows the themes of the research, combined from both literature reviews. Volunteer motivations are by far the most popular theme in the literature. A little over a third of all

(27)

the articles (37) concentrate on them. The popularity of the topic largely arises from an assumption that understanding motivations leads to effective volunteer recruitment and retention strategies. The studies on motivations tend to be quantitatively influenced. Despite the vast amount of research done on the topic of motivations, there is no overall answer about what motivates event volunteers.

Motives differ depending on the nature of the volunteering activity, the context where they are measured, and the demographics of the target group.

Generally, the motives can be categorised under affiliatory and egoistic motives. Affiliatory motives involve interest in the event activity and the community around it; wanting to make the event a success. Conversely, egoistic motives are based on the benefits of volunteering to the individual volunteer.

They are more instrumental; such as achieving personal goals (e.g. building stronger CV) or enhancing feelings of worthiness and self-esteem. According to research, the latter motives may be stronger among the younger volunteers at the moment. In order to take advantage of this trend, events should be building effective volunteer programmes that develop skills and knowledge (e.g. Barron & Rihova, 2011; Bassett & Lomax, 2014; Quinn, 2013).

(28)

Table 2. The main themes of research on event volunteering.

Theme Articles

Motivation (37 articles)

Allen and Bartle (2014); Allen and Shaw (2009); Bachman et al. (2014);

Bachman et al. (2016); Bang et al. (2008); Bang et al. (2009); Bang et al. (2014b); Dickson et al. (2013); Dickson et al. (2014); Dickson et al.

(2015); Downward and Ralston (2005); Giannoulakis et al. (2007); Gian- noulakis et al. (2015); Grammatikopoulos et al. (2006); Güntert et al.

(2015); Han et al. (2013); Jarvis and Blank (2011); Khoo and Engelhorn ( 2007, 2011); Kim et al. (2010b); Kumnig et al. (2015); Lee at al. (2013);

Lee et al. (2014a); Lockstone-Binney et al. (2015); MacLean and Hamm (2007); Monga (2006); Nassar and Talaat (2009); Peachey et al. (2014);

Skille and Hanstad (2013); Skirstad and Hanstad (2013); Surujlal (2010);

Treuren (2009); Treuren (2014); Wakelin (2013); Wang and Wu (2014);

Wang and Yu (2015); VanSickle et al. (2015) Experiences

and satisfaction (28 articles)

Aisbett and Hoye (2014); Bladen (2010); Campbell (2010); Clayton (2016); Downward et al. (2005); Fairley et al. (2013); Fairley et al. (2014);

Fayos Gardó et al. (2014); Filo et al. (2009); Gallarza et al. (2009); Gal- larza et al. (2013); Giannoulakis et al. (2015); Gravelle and Larocque (2005); Hoeber (2010); Katzeff and Ware (2007); Kemp (2002); Kim et al.

(2010a); Kodama et al. (2013); Leigh et al. (2013); Long and Goldenberg (2010); Nichols and Ojala (2009); Ralston et al. (2004, 2005); Shaw (2009); Sheptak and Menaker (2016); Tomazos and Luke (2015); Wood et al. (2010); Wu et al. (2014)

Commitment and retention (18 articles)

Aisbett et al. (2015); Bachman et al. (2014); Bachman et al. (2016); Bang (2009); Bang et al. (2014a); Bang et al. (2016); Cuskelly et al. (2004);

Elstad (2003); Fairley et al. (2013); Han et al. (2013); Kristiansen et al. (2015); Lee et al. (2014b); Love et al. (2012); MacLean and Hamm (2007); Pauline (2011); Pauline and Pauline (2009); Peachey et al.

(2014); Webber (2012); Wollebaek et al. (2014) Aspects of

management (e.g. selection, training, scheduling) (14 articles)

Aisbett and Hoye (2015); Chanavat and Ferrand (2010); Elandu and Ogujiofor (2012); Fanshan et al. (2013); Gordon and Erkut (2004, 2005); Hede and Rentschler (2007); Landey and Silvers (2004); Leigh et al. (2013); Lockstone et al. (2010); Ragsdell and Jepson (2014); Shae (2009); Wilks (2015); Zhuang and Girginov (2012)

Impacts and legacies (8 articles)

Benson et al. (2014), Darcy et al. (2014); Dickson et al. (2015); Nichols and Ralston (2011, 2012); Peachey et al. (2015); Parris and Peachey (2012); Solberg (2003)

Other (2 articles) Baum and Lockstone (2007); John Lucas (2014)

Source: Smith, Baum, Holmes and Lockstone-Binney (2014, p. 9), with the follow-up literature review by the author added.

(29)

The second biggest theme of research into event volunteers was experiences and satisfaction (28 articles) (Table 2), which includes various subthemes.

Experiences and satisfaction are affected by various factors. If an event has a good reputation in general, then expectations of volunteer experiences are also higher. Events with a good reputation are expected to offer good volunteering experiences as well. Experiences and satisfaction are strongly dependent on the quality of the tasks assigned to the volunteer and the treatment they receive from the event organisation, in the manner of professional operational skills and quality volunteer management. Experiences and satisfaction are on the same continuum as motivations. Expectations set by motivations affect the expectations that are set for the event, and how it is experienced. Satisfaction with a volunteer experience affects the decision to volunteer in the future. If emotions involving a volunteering experience are positive, it is likely to lead to the retention of volunteers (e.g. Bang, 2009; Quinn, 2013). Commitment and retention are also a separate theme in event volunteer studies and research on the topic has been increasing during the last couple of years. Eighteen articles were found on the topic in the literature review.

Research into other aspects of management in operational contexts includes recruitment, allocation and training volunteers and planning their work-flow. This stream of research generally concentrates on how to manage volunteers so that they contribute effectively, however, there were only 14 articles found about managing volunteers. As Quinn (2013, p. 156-157) notes, it is interesting that studies on event volunteers put great effort into recruitment, but more effort on volunteer management is needed. Accord- ing to Iso-Aho (2011) focus on the management of volunteers in the event management textbooks is also scant. Many take the viewpoint of traditional project management in volunteer management where the motivations for the work maybe radically different than when committing to paid work. A different approach is called for handling volunteers as a technical resource in event production (Iso-Aho, 2011).

The final theme identified in the literature was impact and legacy studies, focusing especially on major sports events. This research focuses on the more permanent impacts of events on the areas in which they are held at. Legacies to volunteering have been understood as building lasting volunteering schemes,

(30)

developing a sense of community in an area, and through these actions, im- proving the capacity of the places where events are held (e.g. Doherty, 2009).

Compared to the positions taken by previous research into event volunteering, my study will shed light from the experiential point of view of the volunteers on the management of the events. Methodologically it joins the increasing number of qualitative accounts of the phenomenon. The use of ethnographic methods in researching event volunteers or events in general has been rare.

Only four studies out of one hundred articles reviewed used ethnographic methods (Campbell, 2010; John Lucas, 2014; Kodama, Doherty, & Popovic, 2013; Sheptak & Menaker, 2016; see also Leigh, Lamont, & Cairncross, 2014).

More broadly in event studies, ethnography has gained ground (e.g. Stadler, Reid, & Fullagar, 2013). My aim in this study is therefore to continue to use and develop the emerging methodological enquiry in the field through the method of autoethnography which I will discuss in more detail in Chapter 3.

There is a clear gap in longitudinal studies on event volunteering. Case studies have been prevalent in the literature and longitudinal studies tend to focus on a single event. The study at hand is a longitudinal study of a volunteer experience and the development of knowing through different events, festivals and other life events. It draws on different event settings to analyse knowing and the experiences built and gained through volunteering. The nature of events as “one-time spectacles” and the use of quantitative methods has possibly guided the research into the volunteering phenomenon towards the prevailing research setting of single event case studies. The aim of this study is to construct the phenomenon from the point of view of knowing, where the focus shifts from the individual event to the multi-sited phenomenon in and through which the knowing builds.

1.4 Choreography as a way of understanding co-creation

Knowledge has been a central concept from the very beginning of this study.

The emerging discussion on co-creation in marketing studies at the beginning of the 2000s offered a fitting conceptual construct with which to analyse

(31)

events. The use of knowledge in building services and experiences gave a good premise for the study, but I struggled to make the theory “fit” my research approach. The managerial view point and the instrumental nature of theorising knowledge did not depict the empirical experiences that were more complex than the managerial co-creation discussion. In 2011 I happened to participate in the Science Forum in the University of Lapland and heard philosopher Jaana Parviainen give a lecture on the choreographies of power and resistance in the city space (see Parviainen, 2010). It immediately struck me that there was something very fitting in using the concept of choreography to analyse events and the volunteer knowledge in action. The movement related approach, where knowledge is approached through such vehicles as affect and body, felt like the missing puzzle piece that fitted my experiences of volunteer knowledge (see also Parviainen, 2011a).

In this study, I understand events and festivals as co-creational contexts where actors practice their knowledge. To further the idea of knowledge inside the co-creation discussion the concept of choreography is used as an analytical framework. The concept originates from cultural and performance studies and gives access to the relationship between place, space, experiences and knowledge (e.g. Laine, 2015; Parviainen, 2010; Puumala & Pehkonen, 2010). Choreography constructs knowledge as active doings performed through the body, which is referred to as ‘knowing’ in this study. In the event management literature, events are often described as choreographed entities staged by the event managers (e.g. Getz, 1997). In this study, I also adopt the concept of choreography but understand it as an arrangement of place built constantly by the people participating in it (e.g. Edensor, 2001; Parviainen, 2010). In addition to the social reality, the material aspects of place also play a substantial role in this process. Different temporary materialities are central in the production of the meanings attached to a place. These also include the recognition of the body as “an affective vehicle through which we sense place and movement” (Hannam, Sheller, & Urry, 2006, p. 14; see also Veijola &

Valtonen, 2007). Choreographing can be understood as guided improvisation, since the volunteers are in most cases given training and guidance in their tasks, but the temporary arrangements of the event leave room for, and oftentimes even require, improvisation (see Yakhlef & Essen, 2013).

(32)

By viewing event co-creation as choreography I wish to further discuss the dichotomy of production and consumption sustained in many of the previous studies on the phenomenon. I also wish to understand knowledge as an actively constructed entity that is profoundly connected in movement and embodiment. Choreography as an analytical framework offers insight to affective and aesthetic embodied knowing and provides possibilities to understand knowledge as personal, collective and structural phenomenon, and how these intertwine and manifest in the event context. A more versatile understanding of knowing leverages possibilities to understand value.

1.5 The structure of the study

This first chapter of the study has introduced the empirical phenomenon and conceptual definitions of volunteering. It has also briefly introduced the main theoretical framework of the study. In Chapter Two, I move on to discuss the concept of co-creation in more detail and propose choreography as a novel analytical lens to leverage the theorising of co-creation. I also review previous studies on event co-creation and position this study in relation to them. The third chapter introduces the methodological choices of this study in detail.

The study was conducted as a multi-sited, autoethnographic account, and I describe the methodological and ethical choices made as well as present the method of analysing the data. In the fourth chapter I present the findings of this study on volunteer knowing. Each sub-chapter makes an independent analysis of the different levels of volunteer knowing in action in event choreography. Finally, in Chapter Five, I draw conclusions based on the findings of the study, but also evaluate the research process and suggest future avenues for research on both co-creation and event volunteering. I also present the managerial implications of the study.

(33)

2 Co-creation through the analytic lens of choreography

2.1 Co-creation paradigm in marketing

In this chapter I set out to explore the notion of knowledge in event co-creation (e.g. Björner & Berg, 2012; Lugosi, 2014; Rihova, 2013; Van Limburg, 2008) and do so by proposing the concept of choreography as an analytical concept through which to understand it (e.g. Parviainen, 2010, 2011a;

Pehkonen & Puumala, 2008). The concept of co-creation originates from the marketing literature and concentrates on the process of value creation and the role of knowledge within it (e.g. Prahalad & Ramaswamy, 2004; Vargo

& Lusch, 2004). The very concept of knowledge has been left somewhat unexplored in both services marketing and event management literature (cf.

Ragsdell & Jepson, 2014; Stadler et al., 2013). Since knowledge is considered a central resource for building value in the co-creation processes, it should be put under more careful scrutiny in order to better understand the different forms of knowledge that are being mobilised in event value co-creation.

The concept of co-creation has been a contemporary topic in marketing theory over the last decade (see Galvagno & Dalli, 2014). When introducing the concept, scholars Vargo and Lusch (2004) proposed that it relates to the shift in the marketing discussion from goods to services, meaning that skills and knowledge become the fundamental unit of exchange. Value is created in a continuous learning process with the customers, who are the primary tangible resources for the firms. Value is negotiated between firm and customer in this process (e.g. Prahalad & Ramaswamy, 2004; Vargo & Lusch, 2004, pp. 1-11), however, value not only resides in this relationship, but is also created in the practices and actions of communities (e.g. Peñaloza & Mish, 2011, pp. 10-12;

Peñaloza & Venkatesh, 2006, p. 309; Vargo & Lusch, 2008; also Haanpää, García-Rosell & Kyyrä, 2013; Rihova, 2013). To understand such value, an understanding of the knowledge through which it builds is vital.

(34)

The discussion of the concept of co-creation has developed and taken different streams during the years. These understand the positions and roles of the companies and consumers in the co-creation process differently and their theoretical premises rest on different backgrounds. They can be divided roughly in two: management-oriented and cultural. The management-oriented discussion has taken place primarily in mainstream marketing journals and in the fields of services and industrial marketing (see Galvagno & Dalli, 2014). Conversely, the cultural co-creation discussion has taken place in journals and by scholars concentrating on cultural theorisations of marketing, and on the other hand in consumer research, especially consumer culture theory (Cova, Dalli, & Zwick, 2011; Cova, Pace, & Skålén, 2015; Echeverri

& Skålén, 2011). A critical stream of thought that basically questions the whole idea of co-creation can be identified in the cultural co-creation discussion (e.g. Zwick, Bonsu, & Darmody, 2008; see also Hietanen, Andéhn,

& Bradshaw, 2017). Over the years, the management-oriented stream of research has occasionally approached the ideas of the cultural stream that are drawn from social sciences (e.g. Edvardsson, Tronvoll, & Gruber, 2011;

see also Akaka, Vargo, & Jensen Schau, 2015). In this sub-chapter I briefly discuss the different streams of thought as an introduction to the conceptual framework of this study.

The management-oriented co-creation discussion was started by Prahalad and Ramaswamy (2004) and made mainstream by Vargo and Lusch (2004).

The co-creation concept is at the heart of the services dominant logic (SDL) introduced by Vargo and Lusch, in which they proposed a paradigm shift in marketing theory from goods to services, where the role of the consumer in the production process was also widened (Vargo & Lusch, 2004). This proposal was accepted overall and the concept of co-creation can nowadays be found in most versatile connections. It has been used extensively in theoretical and practical enquiries in the field of marketing and beyond. When services are viewed as co-created, skills and knowledge and their use are considered a company’s key resources in creating value for their offerings and thus the fundamental unit of exchange (Vargo & Lusch, 2004, p. 6). According to Vargo and Lusch (2004), value is negotiated between the firm and the customers in the market in collaboration and mutual learning. The identification of core

(35)

competences and skills is central, since these create the competitive advantage (Vargo & Lusch, 2004, p. 5). The resources available for the companies are both operand (invisible) and operant (tangible), and customers are the most important operant resources as co-producers of value (Vargo & Lusch, 2004, p. 2, 11). The co-creation of value happens through collaboration and continuous learning from customers. In their very first theorisation on co-creation Vargo and Lusch proposed that companies should focus on the processes that create value and maximise consumer involvement in order to create the offering best suited to customer needs (2004, pp. 11-12).

The idea of co-creation was well received in marketing research, but along the way original authors amongst many other marketing scholars have evalu- ated, critiqued and developed further the thoughts that were put forward.

This happened inside the management-oriented stream of thought where ideas have been developed, but also through a more critical cultural marketing approach. In the management-oriented stream recent critiques and developments have been directed, for example, towards the vagueness of the concept of value and how it builds (e.g. Grönroos & Voima, 2013). Value is described as constructed as a rather metaphorical concept in the original theorising of Vargo & Lusch (2004), and it is suggested, for example by Grönroos (2012), that instead of treating it metaphorically, an interactional, contextual treatment of the concept in direct customer-provider relations would provide better theorising. To further understand the interaction and context in co-creation scholars have moved towards social constructionist, and more recently also practice-based, approaches (see e.g. Edvardsson et al., 2011; Rihova, Buhalis, Moital, & Gouthro, 2013; Storbacka, Frow, Nenonen,

& Payne, 2012). The possibility of co-destruction instead of a successful co- creation process has also received attention (Plé & Chumpitaz Cáceres, 2010;

Event co-creation as choreography : autoethnographic study on event volunteer knowing

Minni Haanpää

Event co-creation as choreography

Minni Haanpää

Event co-creation as choreography

Abstract

Acknowledgements

List of tables

Contents

1 Introduction

2 Co-creation through the analytic lens of choreography